JACOBS v. YORK/POQUOSON, 1489-92-1, Unpublished (Va.App. 10-5-1993)

PER CURIAM

Deborah J. Jacobs appeals the trial court's termination of her residual parental rights to her daughter, Misty Blue. She contends that the evidence was insufficient to justify termination pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(C)(2), and that the hearing was conducted without written notice to the foster parents in accordance with Code § 16.1-283(A). Jacobs also complains that the trial court erred in denying monthly visits with the child pending appeal.

The parties are fully conversant with the record in the cause, and a recitation of the facts is unnecessary to this memorandum opinion.

"Under familiar principles we view [the] evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below." Martin v. Pittsylvania County Dep't of Social Servs., 3 Va. App. 15, 20, 348 S.E.2d 13, 16 (1986). "`The burden is on the party who alleges reversible error to show by the record that reversal is the remedy to which [she] is entitled.'"Lutes v. Alexander, 14 Va. App. 1075, 1077, 421 S.E.2d 857, 859 (1992) (quoting Johnson v. Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 391, 396, 404 S.E.2d 384, 387 (1991)).

In the instant case, the order of the trial court detailed its "findings of fact based upon the clear and convincing evidence adduced" during an ore tenus hearing. These determinations are well supported by the record, consistent with termination of Jacobs' residual parental rights pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(C)(2) and will not be disturbed on appeal. See Martin, 3 Va. App. at 20, 348 S.E.2d at 16.

Jacobs' procedural complaints are, likewise, without merit. The trial court properly exercised its authority in refusing to permit visitation during the pendency of this appeal, see Code § 16.1-296, and the record before us does not disclose a specific objection to any deficiency in notice to the foster parents. See Rule 5A:18.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.